The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1887-02-24
GREER COUNTY.
Who Has Done the Most to Re.
claim it for the State?

10 lne EulLOr OF the statesman.
During the year of 1878 Pressler's &
Langerman's map of Texas was compiled
from the records of the general land Of
flee, and certified to by the commission
er of the general land office as a correct
map, which places the initial monument
on the south fork of Red River, and
states on said map as established by the
boundary commission, our own state
map thus showing Greer county to be
wholly in the Indian Territory. Colonel
William H. Russell, the boundary com
missioner on the part of Texas, when the
note upon this map was called to his at
tenticn, said it conveyed an erroneous
impression, as he never co-operated in
running the one hundredth meridian, and
that no monument was ever erected on
the Pararie Dogtown river except that
erected by Messrs. Jones and Brown.
Col. Swisher went to Washington City
and found the authorities at Washing
ington claimed that the joint commission
did agree. He produced Col. Russelfs
denial, and after a long time, nearly two
years, succeeded i'll getting the authori-
ties to examine the question, and they
found, from the report of the commits
sion, that Col. Russell did not
agree and did not sign the
report. This was in the spring
of 1882. During the year of 1879 the cat
tlemen were driven out of Greer county
by the United States government. SEN
ator Maxey and Congressman Wellborn
asked permission of congress for the cat
tlemen to Craze their cattle in Greer
county, which was refused. In the spring
of 1883 Col. Swisher located for the old
2 veterans ninety-eight 1880 acre certif-
Gates, on joist accounts, he paying all ex-
penses at the time of these locations. 1t
was published by nearly all the leading
papers in the state that he was making
these locations, and not one word was
ever uttered against his making the same;
on the other hand he was advised to do
so by the state officers. Every one be-
lieved it was the only way IN which to set
tie the question as to whom Greer county
belonged. These locations were patented
>, during the year 1888. In 1884 j. M. Day,
John W. Powers and Maddox Bros. 81 An
derson purchased the cattle owned by
Murphy Bros Haynie g. Handy and r. L.
Parker, which were located in Greer
county. They, wishing to be law-abiding
citizens, purchased veteran certificates
and located $4,000 acres of land at cost
of S1.25 per acre. They then organized
the Day Land and Cattle company, and
are now the sole owners of the stock of
said company. In August of 1854
rfthe United States government ordered
every person out of Greer county by the
first day of October, 1884. The attorneys
of Hol. Swisher and the Day Land and
Cattle company succeeded, with the as
sistance of Judge Merrick, of Washington
CITY, in getting said order revoked on the
twenty-seventh day of September, by
their showing they were holding under
patents from the state. These parties
have paid taxes to the state; they have
held possession for the state; they paid
rsfor their certificates. and located them,
II taking their chances with Texas. They
are tenants of Texas. They advertised
the advantages of Greer county, and now
. the same is an organized comfy.
Col. Swisher and the Day Land and Cat
tie Company have paid towards assisting
Texas in this question about $4,000.
Texas has expended $4,000. If the own
ers of the patents held absolute title from
! lTexas is there lawyer in the senate who
iAould advise the loan of 800 on each
1,2SO acre survey, as long as the boundary
question is unsettled, while these certiti-
Gates cost the owners 500 each? So, you
will see, INDICATED they are worth $50.
Located and patented in Greer county
won't sell for 800. When the Day Land
Il and Cattle company was mott
fed by the attorney general in
u the spring of 1886 he was going to sue
$or the cancellation of their patents, they
Called on the commissioner of the general
land Office and. stated to him they were
satisfied their patents were legally issued,
but they did not wish to fight the state for
title, and the United States for the state,
and requested the patents cancelled and
their certificates hoated. This was refused
by the commissioner. They then re-
quested the attorney general to defer the
suit until the title of Texas was estab-
lf5hed, as Limitation did not run against
the state. This was refused. They were
forced to defend their suit at an enormous
expense. They now ask the legislat ure OF
their state to grant them what title Texas
has in said lands, still leaving over 1000
600 acres INDICATE ed. They also ask
that they grant to settlers homestead do
nations. Should the relief asked be
nH granted will i t not force every settler
and the owners of The lands to become
advocates of the claim of the United
States government? When this question
comes mp in the senate on next Friday
each senator should weigh well every ques
uon In the case before casting his vote